Legalectric

Just in — Verbatim from Minnesota Pollution Control Agency:

Second Request for Comments on Planned Amendments to Air Quality Rules – Air Toxics Emissions Reporting

April 1, 2024 Second Request for Comments on Planned Amendments to Air Quality Rules Relating to Air Toxics Emissions Reporting The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) published a Request for Comments (RFC) on planned amendments to air quality rules relating to air toxics emissions reporting in the July 24, 2023, State Register. A second RFC was published in the April 1, 2024, State Register. This rulemaking is referred to as the Air Toxics Emissions Reporting Rule (Revisor ID# R-4599). The RFC includes instructions on how to comment. The public comment period closes at 4:30 p.m. on Wednesday, May 1, 2024. The main purpose of this rulemaking is to establish new rules for air toxics emissions reporting requirements for facilities located in the 7-county metro area, as directed by Minnesota Session Law – 2023. The purpose of this second RFC is to incorporate the repeal of certain sections of chapter 7007 that allow a Title V air permittee to assert emergency affirmative defense. The EPA has repealed these provisions from the Clean Air Act Title V operating permit program regulations and has set a deadline for states to remove this language, or to seek an extension to remove the language as soon as practicable, by August 21, 2024. The MPCA has applied for an extension and intends to repeal the language with this rulemaking since the air quality rule chapters are already open for air toxics emissions reporting. The notice is also available by visiting the MPCA webpage for this rulemaking. Information about the MPCA’s concepts for amending the rules is also available on the rulemaking webpage. To access information about a particular rulemaking, visit the public rulemaking docket.

INFORMATIONAL MEETING

APRIL 8, 2020 from 5:30 – 6:30

RED WING PUBLIC LIBRARY

Join the fun! (SNORT!) Learn about air permitting — how Minnesota Pollution Control Agency’s (MPCA) air quality permitting process works, how to write a comment, and what current and planned emissions are.

Unfortunately, it’s the same time as the City Council meeting. Well, drat… will have to make sure it’s recorded.

A few months ago, I started pushing the MPCA for a meeting here in Red Wing, informational, to let folks know what’s going on. The air permit for this plant expired in 2009, and although Xcel Energy has applied for renewal, the MPCA has not gotten to it yet (nor for so many air permits in Minnesota, Alan filed Data Practices Act Request and got the list, most air permits were waiting in line with nothing happening).

Alan and I have also been on the Red Wing City Council to push for action on this. They did send a letter to the MPCA, urging action, but that was years ago. HOWEVER, progress — they did schedule a meeting! And best of all, during this, we learned that they are working on the air permit renewal! Draft permit isn’t out yet, but maybe soon?

p.s. Here’s the link for Minnesota Air Quality — or lack thereof!

Yesterday was the deadline for “Public Comments” so here are the World Organization for Landowner Freedom (WOLF) Comments:

Bottom line: The court recommends Eastman be disbarred.

His true colors came out in this trial:

Despite the compelling evidence against him, as established in the culpability findings above, Eastman remains defiant, refusing to acknowledge any impropriety whatsoever in his actions surrounding his efforts to dispute the 2020 presidential election results. His lack of insight into the wrongfulness of his misconduct is deeply troubling.

He took a tRumpian stance:

Eastman’s complete denial of wrongdoing, coupled with his attempts to discredit legitimate disciplinary proceedings are concerning. While Eastman is entitled to defend himself, his conduct goes beyond this, revealing a complete failure to understand the wrongfulness of his actions. His unwillingness to consider the impropriety of his conduct goes “beyond tenacity to truculence.” (In re Morse (1995) 11 Cal.4th 184, 209 [unwillingness to consider appropriateness of legal challenge or acknowledge its lack of merit is aggravating].) Accordingly, the court assigns substantial weight in aggravation under this factor. (In the Matter of Layton (Review Dept. 1993) 2 Cal. State Bar Ct. Rptr. 366, 380-381 [ongoing failure to acknowledge wrongdoing instills concern that attorney may commit future misconduct].)

As the tRump dockets move forward, it’s time to indict Eastman, and get the goods on his buddy Ginni Thomas, and his former boss, Clarence Thomas. ONWARD!

Oh my, I had another hissy fit today. Every day, I get zillow postings of homes for sale. Today was this, the one above, here in Red Wing.

13,257 square feet

$2,495,000 price (good luck with that!)

And I wondered who would own this edifice to conspicuous consumption?

Naaah, not Thorsten Veblen. Turns out it’s the Baartman of Keller-Baartman Properties, developers in Red Wing, and elsewhere too.

Ain’t capitalism grand?!?!

Here’s their vacancy map:

Every time we head over to Mayo-Red Wing, and that’s OFTEN until lately, the route on Tyler is right past two of the Keller-Baartman buildings, and I’ve looked at their site with photos, showing the rents. Right now — 60 vacancies in Red Wing — folks are not lining up to rent these apartments:

The City Council approved these apartments, granted developers TIF corporate welfare, and meanwhile, the Council denied a proposal for “affordable” housing (that needed rezoning approval) just on the other side of Tyler. On seeing that “home” for sale, URP! So I sent a missive to the City Council because this is such an extreme example of how our society is SO screwed up.

Sent today to City Council, Mayor, and some staff:

All –

Did ya see this listing?

This is Baartman’s “house.” Baartman of Keller-Baartman.

The Council has approved Keller-Baartman apartment developments in Red Wing, approved building of apartments that are absurdly over-priced. Just over $1,000 a month for a STUDIO,and one right now , a STUDIO, for $1,525!  For a 2 Br, $1,595 at 540Tyler, and $1,465 at 520Tyler.

I believe all of you “own” homes, that none are renters. How many of you are paying less than that $1,030 on your homes? If you are a renter, how much rent are you paying, and for what? Home “values” have shot through the roof. A home purchased right now listed at ~$240k (our zestimate is $239,9, rent zestimate $2,450, ReFi $1,228. HA!), that $240k 3-4 br house has a payment of ~$1,500. Your likely 3+ bedroom homes purchased quite a while ago will likely have much lower monthly payments, and many/most of you are of the age to have paid off your 30 year mortgage, so no mortgage payment. Take a short walk in renters’ shoes.

60 vacancies in their Red Wing properties. https://www.kbproperties.org/vacancies

Meanwhile, as you’re permitting these high-priced apartments, you deny permitting of “affordable” housing on the other side of Tyler, which by my standards (and yours too if you had to pay it monthly?), is NOT affordable. How do you justify this?

Would you rent these options? 60 vacancies means people are not lining up at the door. Isn’t that sufficient proof that that type of housing is NOT needed?!?! NOT wanted? Yet these developers get obscenely rich exploiting regular folks who have nowhere else to go. A 13,257 sq ft. house offered for $2,495,000 is a clear demonstration of lack of balance that the Council is facilitating, enabling.

I realize it’s not “ALL” of you, but enough of you vote to pass and deny these projects.

You are ostensibly in office to represent not just the interests of your demographic, and of those who voted for you, but the interests of ALL of your constituents.  In this case, you should be mindful of all your constituents who are renters. Consider the higher than average percentage of those not voting who are renters! Hmmmm, funny how that works. Renters in your districts ARE your constituents and deserve consideration.

Red Wing needs truly affordable housing, not housing deemed “affordable” by bar napkin calculations. Red Wing does have some “1st time home-buyers” resources, but the cost of housing stock here is obscene and beyond the reach of too many. The Council needs to be mindful of the struggles of regular folks trapped in full-time jobs that don’t pay enough to get out of the renting quicksand. Red Wing needs more affordable rental housing and increased resources for renters to move into home ownership. Home ownership is the most stabilizing force in communities, because then people have a very literal investment in community.

Carol A. Overland, Ward 2 resident, grateful my house is paid off, and homeless if I had to rent or buy a house these days but for the option of affordable hamster-habitats downtown.